On May 18, 2026, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed two rules that would fundamentally reshape America's relationship with forever chemicals in drinking water. The first would rescind the enforceable limits on four PFAS compounds — PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA (commonly called GenX), and mixtures including PFBS — that had been established just two years earlier. The second would extend the compliance deadline for PFOA and PFOS from 2029 to 2031 for an estimated 66,000 eligible water systems nationwide.
The public comment period closes July 20, 2026. A virtual public hearing is scheduled for July 7. What happens next will determine whether 200 million Americans continue drinking water with detectable PFAS — or whether the patchwork of state protections that has emerged becomes the only real line of defense.
This is the story of what happens when the federal government steps back, and the states that refused to follow.
What the Federal Government Built — and What It's Dismantling
In April 2024, EPA finalized the first-ever National Primary Drinking Water Regulation for PFAS — a landmark rule that set enforceable Maximum Contaminant Levels for six forever chemicals. PFOA and PFOS each received an MCL of 4 parts per trillion (ppt), with a health-based goal of zero. Four additional chemicals — PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS — were regulated through a Hazard Index approach that accounted for the cumulative risk of exposure to multiple PFAS simultaneously.
The rule required public water systems to complete initial monitoring by 2027, begin public reporting that same year, and implement treatment solutions by 2029 wherever contamination exceeded the limits. It was the most significant federal drinking water regulation in decades.
The May 2026 proposal would gut roughly two-thirds of that framework. Four of the six regulated PFAS would lose their federal protections entirely. The remaining two — PFOA and PFOS — would keep their 4 ppt limits on paper, but water systems could delay compliance by two years through a new "federal exemption framework." During that delay, systems with PFAS levels between 4 and 12 ppt would face no mandatory mitigation at all. Only those above 12 ppt would be required to take interim action.
EPA has framed the rescission as a procedural correction, arguing that the Biden administration "failed to follow the clear requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act" in regulating the four additional compounds. The agency estimates the rollback would save water systems approximately $82 million annually in compliance costs. It also acknowledges the move would forego roughly $6.7 million per year in public health benefits.
The Communities in the Crosshairs
Numbers like $82 million in cost savings are abstract. The contamination is not.
In Wilmington, North Carolina, more than 770,000 people in the Cape Fear River basin drank water contaminated by GenX discharged from the Chemours Fayetteville Works plant for decades before anyone knew. When NC State researchers first tested the river in 2017, GenX averaged 631 ppt, with some samples as high as 4,500 ppt. By October 2019, PFAS levels near Lock and Dam No. 1 — close to Wilmington's drinking water intake — reached 130,000 ppt. In private wells near the facility, about 70 percent tested positive for GenX, with nearly a third exceeding North Carolina's 140 ppt health goal. One well topped 4,000 ppt.
GenX is HFPO-DA — one of the four chemicals EPA now proposes to deregulate at the federal level.
A 2025 study by NC State researchers found that blood serum samples from Wilmington residents collected between 2010 and 2016 — before anyone knew the water was contaminated — contained high concentrations of two under-studied PFAS: trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) at 17 parts per billion and perfluoromethoxyacetic acid (PFMOAA) at 42 ppb. Downstream from the Chemours plant, PFMOAA levels in river water exceeded one million ppt compared to roughly 5 ppt upstream.
In June 2026, just weeks before the public comment deadline, North Carolina Health News reported that Chemours was nearing a federal settlement over PFAS contamination — but North Carolina itself might be excluded from the recovery, despite hosting the only Chemours GenX manufacturing facility in the country. "Forever chemicals like PFAS cause serious health problems, and one out of three North Carolinians currently drink water with PFAS levels that exceed upcoming federal health standards," said a state official in response.
The States That Refused to Wait
The 2024 federal rule was always designed as a floor, not a ceiling. Several states had already adopted their own PFAS standards years earlier. Those states are now the last line of defense for millions of Americans.
New Jersey was among the first movers. The state set individual MCLs for PFNA at 13 ppt, PFOA at 14 ppt, and PFOS at 13 ppt — standards that took effect before the federal government had finished debating whether to regulate PFAS at all. New Jersey's early action was driven in part by contamination from industrial sites and military installations that had affected communities for years before federal regulators acted.
Michigan adopted some of the most comprehensive state-level PFAS standards in the country, with individual MCLs for six compounds: PFOA at 8 ppt, PFOS at 16 ppt, PFHxS at 51 ppt, PFNA at 6 ppt, PFBS at 420 ppt, and HFPO-DA (GenX) at 12 ppt. Michigan's standards cover every chemical EPA now proposes to deregulate — meaning that Michigan residents retain protections their counterparts in states without independent standards will lose.
Massachusetts took a different approach, establishing a combined MCL of 20 ppt for the sum of six PFAS chemicals: PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, PFNA, PFHpA, and PFDA. The aggregate standard captures the reality that most contaminated water contains mixtures of PFAS, not a single compound.
Vermont followed a similar model with a combined standard of 20 ppt for the sum of five PFAS. New Hampshire set individual limits — PFOA at 12 ppt, PFOS at 15 ppt, PFHxS at 18 ppt, and PFNA at 11 ppt. New York established MCLs of 10 ppt for both PFOA and PFOS.
These states are not waiting for Washington. Their protections exist independent of federal rule, and they are enforceable regardless of what EPA does or does not finalize.
The Accountability Gap
But what about the states that haven't acted? The federal exemption framework applies only to water systems in jurisdictions that have not obtained "primacy" for the PFOA and PFOS standards — which means the delay disproportionately affects communities in states without their own programs. Those tend to be smaller, more rural, and less resourced systems. Approximately 66,000 public water systems are expected to be eligible for the two-year delay.
Meanwhile, some states are moving in the opposite direction from protection. Georgia's proposed Senate Bill 577 — the "Coordinated PFAS Remediation Act" — would strip local governments of the ability to independently file PFAS lawsuits, centralizing all government-entity claims under the state Environmental Protection Division. Under the bill, beginning July 1, 2026, counties and cities would no longer be able to bring or maintain PFAS-related legal actions. Only the state attorney general's office and EPD would have standing. Existing local government lawsuits would be paused.
Supporters, including bill sponsor Senator Sam Watson (R-Moultrie), argue that centralizing litigation prevents duplicative suits and ensures statewide coordination of remediation funds. Critics counter that the bill silences the communities closest to contamination and removes a crucial tool for local accountability. The bill preserves private citizens' right to sue for personal injury — but a homeowner with a contaminated well has far fewer resources than a county government backed by tax revenue and legal staff.
As of this writing, SB 577 remains in the Georgia Senate Committee on Natural Resources and the Environment and has not been enacted. But its mere introduction signals a troubling trend: states not only declining to fill the federal gap, but actively narrowing the avenues through which contaminated communities can seek justice.
The Scale of the Problem
A 2023 U.S. Geological Survey study of tap water across the country estimated that at least 45 percent of American tap water contains one or more PFAS compounds — a finding that spans urban, suburban, and rural water systems. At the national level, researchers have estimated that more than 200 million Americans may be exposed to PFAS through their drinking water at some detectable level.
A 2025 study published in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology estimated that PFAS contamination in drinking water may contribute to approximately 6,864 cancer cases per year in the United States. Counties with PFAS-contaminated drinking water experienced up to a 33 percent higher incidence of certain cancer types — including digestive, endocrine, lung, oral, and pharyngeal cancers — between 2016 and 2021.
These are not hypothetical risks. They are measured outcomes in real communities.
What Comes Next
The comment period for both proposed EPA rules closes July 20, 2026. A virtual public hearing is scheduled for July 7. Registration to provide verbal comments closed July 1.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong has led a multi-state coalition opposing the rollback, stating: "We urge the EPA to abandon this proposal." Harvard's Environmental and Energy Law Program has warned that rescinding standards for four PFAS could "slow future Safe Drinking Water Act rulemakings" — meaning the rollback doesn't just affect these four chemicals, but could create a procedural precedent that makes it harder to regulate any new contaminant.
For communities in states with strong independent standards — New Jersey, Michigan, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York — the federal rollback changes little. Their water systems will continue monitoring, treating, and reporting on PFAS.
For everyone else, the question is simpler and harder: Who is looking out for you?
EPR's Position
At the EPR Foundation, we believe that drinking water standards should be based on science, not convenience. The 2024 federal rule was imperfect, but it represented the first enforceable floor for PFAS in American drinking water. Rolling back protections for four chemicals while delaying compliance on the remaining two is a step backward for public health.
We also recognize that the states leading on PFAS — often at significant cost to their own water systems — deserve recognition and support, not a race to the bottom. The patchwork of state standards that now serves as America's primary PFAS defense was never meant to be permanent. It emerged because the federal government was too slow, and it persists because the federal government is now retreating.
Clean water is not a partisan issue. It is a basic obligation of government at every level. We encourage anyone with standing to submit public comments before July 20 and to demand that their state — whatever its politics — adopt enforceable PFAS standards that protect the people who drink the water.
Sources: EPA Proposed PFOA and PFOS Compliance Extension Rule (epa.gov, May 2026); Federal Register 91 FR 29413 (May 20, 2026); Harvard Environmental & Energy Law Program PFAS tracker (eelp.law.harvard.edu); Ballard Spahr LLP, "EPA Rolls Back PFAS Regulations, States Fill the Gap" (June 2026); NRDC, "Wilmington's Battle With GenX" (nrdc.org); NC Health News, "Chemours PFAS Settlement" (June 25, 2026); The New Lede, "New North Carolina PFAS Exposure Findings" (October 2025); Cohen Milstein, Cape Fear River PFAS Litigation (cohenmilstein.com); Connecticut Attorney General press release (December 2025); MG+M LLP, "EPA Proposes Rollback of Biden-Era PFAS Drinking Water Standards" (June 2026); Li et al., Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology (2025); U.S. Geological Survey national tap water PFAS study (2023); Georgia SB 577 bill text (legis.ga.gov); The Georgia Virtue, "Proposed Bill Strips Local Governments of Ability to File Suits" (March 2026).